Moderator: Moderators
tmazanec1 wrote:My cousin's husband is a ski instructor (that's why she lives in Colorado). He informed me that ski slopes have a grading (I forget how it went), that sorted them from "easy for beginners" to "hard for experts"
Does caving have a similar system?
Leclused wrote:This classification is only of use for experienced cavers who perfectly master all rigging- and SRT-techniques and are in good physical condition
Tlaloc wrote:this is a horrible idea for a whole lot of reasons.
JSDunham wrote:Tlaloc wrote:this is a horrible idea for a whole lot of reasons.
...none of which are important enough to mention? I don't find that a compelling argument. It certainly doesn't seem to be true of this discussion, nor of the similar cavechat threads I can find. In point of fact, it seems that a number of people have developed such systems which are informally in use in many places, and formally in some.
This topic has other examples: http://forums.caves.org/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=5617&hilit=cave+rating+system
JSDunham wrote:The place where I feel a classification system would be most helpful would where relative newcomers or strangers to an area want to know something about whether they have the skills for a given cave (such as at NSS conventions, regional events, and generally open grotto trips). To be useful I think such a system would have to rate a number of factors, such as difficulty of rope work, tightness of squeezes, difficulty of climbs, how wet a cave is, how cold it is, etc. This would be especially important for long caves, where advanced and beginner trips are both possible depending on the route one takes.
GroundquestMSA wrote:JSDunham wrote:Tlaloc wrote:this is a horrible idea for a whole lot of reasons.
What would they call a 4 hour trip with a lot of ropework? What about an intensely strenuous 7 hour trip? What about a 24 hour trip with no squeezing or ropework in an easy cave? Forget about ratings and go caving! Either someone will tell you what's involved and you can go or not go, or you'll all find out when you get there.
GroundquestMSA wrote: they are pointless ... absolutely nothing ... don't need and can't use ... The only people who I imagine could want a grading system ... it is impossible to seriously suggest a practically useful grading system ... Forget about ratings and go caving! Either someone will tell you what's involved and you can go or not go, or you'll all find out when you get there.
caver.adam wrote:We could totally set up a ratings system. Although descriptions are probably a better way to go. Numerics to describe the passage difficulty, and letters to describe specific skills required on the trip.
Example:
1. Walking tour cave with lights and railings. No equipment required.
2. Walking cave. Basic safety equipment and lights required.
3. Cave with obstacles, boulders, and crawling. Safety equipment required.
4. Cave with occasional squeezes, belly crawls, or climb-ups. Safety...
5. Cave with frequent squeezes, belly crawls, or climb-ups.
F. Freeclimbing required.
V. Vertical equipment and technique required.
S. Size of caver limited through choke point.
W. Wetsuit required.
O. Overnight equipment required.
Etc.
GroundquestMSA wrote:...Tlaloc, the Engganon goddess...
caver.adam wrote:We could totally set up a ratings system. Although descriptions are probably a better way to go. Numerics to describe the passage difficulty, and letters to describe specific skills required on the trip.
Example:
1. Walking tour cave with lights and railings. No equipment required.
2. Walking cave. Basic safety equipment and lights required.
3. Cave with obstacles, boulders, and crawling. Safety equipment required.
4. Cave with occasional squeezes, belly crawls, or climb-ups. Safety...
5. Cave with frequent squeezes, belly crawls, or climb-ups.
F. Freeclimbing required.
V. Vertical equipment and technique required.
S. Size of caver limited through choke point.
W. Wetsuit required.
O. Overnight equipment required.
Etc.
JSDunham wrote:caver.adam wrote:We could totally set up a ratings system. Although descriptions are probably a better way to go. Numerics to describe the passage difficulty, and letters to describe specific skills required on the trip.
Example:
1. Walking tour cave with lights and railings. No equipment required.
2. Walking cave. Basic safety equipment and lights required.
3. Cave with obstacles, boulders, and crawling. Safety equipment required.
4. Cave with occasional squeezes, belly crawls, or climb-ups. Safety...
5. Cave with frequent squeezes, belly crawls, or climb-ups.
F. Freeclimbing required.
V. Vertical equipment and technique required.
S. Size of caver limited through choke point.
W. Wetsuit required.
O. Overnight equipment required.
Etc.
I like that; simple but pretty comprehensive.
I think it is important to note here that what we are talking about is really rating cave trips, not entire caves. Of course, this is the more reasonable analogy to other rating systems; skiers and hikers do not rate entire mountains and climbers do not rate entire cliffs. Instead, of course, what one rates is a route. It seems like most of the systems mentioned so far do that implicitly, and I like this one for its elegance and user-friendliness. Your key would help those unfamiliar with a cave easily discern at a glance what is required for a given trip; even if not for general use, I'm going to consider including a version of this in any future guidebooks I compile.
Return to Caving General Discussion and Questions Forum
Users browsing this forum: No registered users